Well known Economist Tyler Cowen (Bloomberg, Marginal Revolution) interviews Jordan Peterson about everything from Communism to Marriage and Fame to the Intellectual Dark Web. You have to praise Cowen for that question alone: „Your peers in the Intellectual Dark Web — the best of them — what is it they’re wrong about?“
Below from this Transcript is Petersons take on communism as a non-playable game compared to western society as a playable game. I think it’s an incredible smart take and he’s precicely correct. I also think that this is why social democracy always has the real advantage agains both socialism and communism on one hand and unregulated neoliberalism on the other hand, because that unregulated neoliberalism is a game that simply is too hard and fast for large parts of society to play.
Perception is an unbelievably deep mystery. So you interpose a very deep structure between you and the world, and that structure has — what would you call it? You can differentiate it into its subcomponents. And what appears to me to be at the base of that structure, conceptually, is something approximating a narrative. There’s various ways of looking at it. You can think about it as a shared game. But narrative, I think, is the best way of thinking about it.
And I never came across anybody who had a deeper understanding of narrative than Carl Jung. So his work was unbelievably influential for me, partly because it was through Jung that I started to understand the metaphysics of the idea of the sovereignty of the individual, which I think is the great Western idea, that the fundamental perceptual — what would you say? — that the most appropriate perceptual framework for a social interaction at the familial and the community level is to view each individual as unique and sovereign.
When I wrote my first book, which was Maps of Meaning, I was very curious about whether the tension between the communist viewpoint and the Western viewpoint, roughly speaking, was merely a matter of opinion, which is something you might think if you were a moral relativist, or perhaps even a postmodernist — that there’s a multitude of ways that you can set up a society and they’re each equally, arbitrarily valuable. And there’s an infinite set of methods by which a society might be generated. That’s one hypothesis.
As I got deeper and deeper into the analysis of both systems, I thought, “No, that’s just wrong.” There’s some things that the West got. What we designed in the West is a playable game, technically speaking, and what was designed by the communists was a nonplayable game. It was destined to degenerate across time because it couldn’t function in a real-world environment. It was an abstraction that couldn’t maintain itself if it was iterated.
Journalists better do their jobs and take a closer look at the guy rather than going the lazy ass route calling him a rightwinger for some cheap twitter karma.